Comments on: The Israel prism

By: Gary Rosen

Gary Rosen — Wed, 05 May 2010 04:39:48 +0000

Minor nit, soccerdad – wasn’t it Foreign Policy, not Foreign Affairs, that had the anti-Israel post referencing Petraeus?

By: Gary Rosen

Gary Rosen — Wed, 05 May 2010 04:37:54 +0000

Ari, the UN resolutions passed after the 1967 war specifically did *NOT* set Israel’s borders or require Israel to stay within the 1949 armisitice line (do you know what that is, I doubt it). It is so typical of those who blame it all on Israel to smugly spout off only to reveal they don’t know WTF they are talking about.

By: Michael Lonie

Michael Lonie — Wed, 05 May 2010 03:23:58 +0000

In any case Israel’s “borders” of 1967 were not recognized international borders. They were merely armistice lines from the 1949 Armistice agreement. In August 1967 Israel offerred to return all the land captured in the June 1967 Six Day War, except Jerusalem. In return Israel wanted recognized borders, a negotiatied peace treaty, and recognition as a nation by the Arab states. The Arabs answered next month with the “Three No’s of Khartoum”, no recognition, no negotiations, no peace. It has never been Israel that stood in the way of peace, but always the Arabs.

When Israel’s enemies say “Peace in the Middle East” what they mean is the destruction of Israel and the genocide of its Jewish inhabitants. When they whine for “American evenhandedness” what they mean is that we should help them do this evil deed.

By: zee

zee — Wed, 05 May 2010 02:49:42 +0000

The UN has no authority to define a countries borders. Almost every country that came into being with the fall of the Ottoman enpire has some border dispute and the UN has never involved itself in any of them.

By: Ari

Ari — Tue, 04 May 2010 20:24:02 +0000

Israels borders as defined by the UN do NOT include the land won in 1967. Its absurd to argue that Israel must keep the land and still be seen as wanting peace?! sigh, you reap what you sow. everything flips around, eventually.